What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Phillip Seymour Hoffman (1 Viewer)

The battle at Needle Park: a success story

Published: 31 May 2012 17:32 GMT+02:00

Updated: 31 May 2012 17:32 GMT+02:00

Facebook Twitter Google+ reddit

Switzerland’s parks were at one time notoriously packed with heroin addicts. Lyssandra Sears meets with one of the world’s leading drug experts to find out how the Swiss broke with convention and cracked the problem.

"The Swiss population has generally always had a high addiction liability in comparison to other European countries, in alcoholism, cigarette smoking, and in illegal drugs as well," says 83-year-old Professor Ambros Uchtenhagen, president of the Addiction Research Institute at Zurich University and consultant to, among others, the World Health Organization.

The heroin problem reached its pinnacle in Switzerland in the 1980s, when cities such as Zurich and Bern became famous for their open drug scenes. These hubs attracted large numbers of drug users from all over the country and beyond.

The scene brought with it drug dealers and crime, as addicts burgled and stole to feed their habits. In an effort to keep the heroin users where they could see them, the police eventually decided to let them take over the city parks. This way, at least the police could keep an eye on them and provide emergency assistance for the frequent cases of overdose.

ADVERTISEMENT

Professor Uchtenhagen, who had set up the in- and out-patient and rehab clinics as part of the University of Zurich's social psychiatry arm, also set up and participated in the mobile emergency teams that would regularly revive overdose patients.

When the scene was at its most extreme, thousands of injectors occupied Switzerland’s green public spaces, he tells The Local. Shared needles caused HIV to spread quickly among users, and it was feared that the disease would spread by sexual means to the non-injecting population.

The parks were unsightly blemishes on an otherwise impeccable landscape and acted as constant reminders to the public of the existence of the problem. Something had to be done.

At first, the authorities tried to control the heroin addicts by punishing them with severe sentences and a zero tolerance attitude. But the strength of their heroin addiction meant that, for most, the threat of legal action was hardly a deterrent.

“We soon realised law enforcement doesn’t change a thing,” Professor Uchtenhagen remembers.

When legal means alone failed to tackle the problem, a new concept was introduced with the aim of reducing the negative consequences of heroin addiction, both for the individual and for society as a whole. Harm reduction, as it became known, soon formed the fourth pillar of Swiss drug policy, alongside the concepts of treatment, prevention and law enforcement.

The introduction of needle exchange programmes, for example, helped prevent the spread of diseases.

“At a relatively early stage our public attitude changed from viewing heroin addicts as criminals, to an image of patients in need of appropriate treatment.”

This pragmatic attitude enabled professionals from a range of disciplines including law enforcement, health, social services and politics to combine efforts to find a range of solutions to the host of issues surrounding heroin abuse.

Professor Uchtenhagen was a member of the Federal Drug Commission at the time, and was responsible for the development and implementation of the research into the use of heroin as a form of treatment.

As a result of these concerted efforts, the Swiss were the first to set up the controversial heroin-assisted programmes in the 1990s. These programmes were targeted at the small proportion of users who did not respond to methadone treatment, enabling professionals to tackle some of the more difficult, hardcore cases.

It is perhaps surprising that such a small, culturally traditional country such as Switzerland should spearhead such an unconventional action plan.

“Switzerland is a very conservative country. But we are also pragmatic,” says Uchtenhagen.

“It is in the Swiss character to want to find out ourselves what’s good for our people, and not to follow the example of others blindly.”

Those working on the projects knew it was crucial to keep the public informed in order to gain their trust.

“Public availability of trustworthy information, on process and outcome data, was paramount,” Uchtenhagen wrote recently in a case study on drug policy.

With his first-hand experience, Professor Uchtenhagen was elected as Chair of the Cantonal Drug Commission, which liaised between the authorities and those on the frontline, and published reports including situational analyses and recommendations for action.

At the time, opinions diverged greatly and not everyone embraced the radical proposals, particularly outside the German-speaking part of Switzerland, which was more affected than other areas.

But the programmes yielded impressive results, and won over many critics, both at home and abroad.

“Other countries started much later with elements such as harm reduction, experimentation, and research on heroin-assisted treatment, so this all contributes to our more visible success,” Professor Uchtenhagen says.

Results from the programmes informed changes in drug policy in the late 80s and 90s, which in turn dramatically reduced the heroin problem.

Police cleared the so-called “Needle Park” in Zurich in February 1992, and addicts were dispersed all over, which was a catastrophe. The scene reformed in an unused railway station nearby and got even worse.

Health professionals responded with a surge in activity: treatment capacity was increased, shelters and day programmes were provided, and low threshold contact and counselling centres were set up throughout the canton. The result was an infrastructure of medical and social care, which helped prevent the same catastrophic consequences when the scene at the railway station was finally closed down in 1994.

In the same year, new clinics for heroin-assisted treatment for the most chronic and marginalised addicts were set up.

Since 1991, deaths as a result of overdose have reduced by approximately 50 percent, and the instance of HIV infections has reduced by 65 percent.

In 1998, the Swiss people voted in favour of the four-pillar policy with a two-thirds majority, and in 1999 a majority voted in favour of continuing heroin-assisted treatment.

Although these results herald good news overall, the fact that the problems are no longer as visible as they once were has had an unintended negative effect - funding to keep the programmes going is no longer as forthcoming as it once was.

“There are other priorities now on the political agenda so it’s not so easy to keep going with the things that we have been setting up and to launch new ones to meet the drug problems of today,” Professor Uchtenhagen laments.

Having dedicated most of his life to working with addictions to substances like heroin, the professor refuses to give up.

He now has his eye on new experiments aimed at Switzerland’s most profuse and popular drug: cannabis. Whether the new experiments turn out to be as successful as the heroin projects remains to be seen.
 
Terrible news. Why do so many celebrities, particularly rock stars and movie stars, succumb to this? What is it in the culture of these professions that brings on such death seeking behavior? Never understood it.
I doubt this happens much more often in celebrities per capita versus the rest of society. We just hear about it more often. Plenty of nobodies have died with needles in their arms in the last few days.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
Yeah but you're not an addict. Has nothing to do with being "smart enough".

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
Yeah but you're not an addict. Has nothing to do with being "smart enough".
You're right. Because I've made the decision throughout my life not to put an needle in my arm.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
Yeah but you're not an addict. Has nothing to do with being "smart enough".
You're right. Because I've made the decision throughout my life not to put an needle in my arm.
Again, not everyone is exactly like you.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?
1) Must make life pretty easy when you can always say it wasn't your fault since you didn't have a choice.

2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.

 
The battle at Needle Park: a success story

Published: 31 May 2012 17:32 GMT+02:00

Updated: 31 May 2012 17:32 GMT+02:00

Facebook Twitter Google+ reddit

Switzerland’s parks were at one time notoriously packed with heroin addicts. Lyssandra Sears meets with one of the world’s leading drug experts to find out how the Swiss broke with convention and cracked the problem.

"The Swiss population has generally always had a high addiction liability in comparison to other European countries, in alcoholism, cigarette smoking, and in illegal drugs as well," says 83-year-old Professor Ambros Uchtenhagen, president of the Addiction Research Institute at Zurich University and consultant to, among others, the World Health Organization.

The heroin problem reached its pinnacle in Switzerland in the 1980s, when cities such as Zurich and Bern became famous for their open drug scenes. These hubs attracted large numbers of drug users from all over the country and beyond.

The scene brought with it drug dealers and crime, as addicts burgled and stole to feed their habits. In an effort to keep the heroin users where they could see them, the police eventually decided to let them take over the city parks. This way, at least the police could keep an eye on them and provide emergency assistance for the frequent cases of overdose.

ADVERTISEMENT

Professor Uchtenhagen, who had set up the in- and out-patient and rehab clinics as part of the University of Zurich's social psychiatry arm, also set up and participated in the mobile emergency teams that would regularly revive overdose patients.

When the scene was at its most extreme, thousands of injectors occupied Switzerland’s green public spaces, he tells The Local. Shared needles caused HIV to spread quickly among users, and it was feared that the disease would spread by sexual means to the non-injecting population.

The parks were unsightly blemishes on an otherwise impeccable landscape and acted as constant reminders to the public of the existence of the problem. Something had to be done.

At first, the authorities tried to control the heroin addicts by punishing them with severe sentences and a zero tolerance attitude. But the strength of their heroin addiction meant that, for most, the threat of legal action was hardly a deterrent.

“We soon realised law enforcement doesn’t change a thing,” Professor Uchtenhagen remembers.

When legal means alone failed to tackle the problem, a new concept was introduced with the aim of reducing the negative consequences of heroin addiction, both for the individual and for society as a whole. Harm reduction, as it became known, soon formed the fourth pillar of Swiss drug policy, alongside the concepts of treatment, prevention and law enforcement.

The introduction of needle exchange programmes, for example, helped prevent the spread of diseases.

“At a relatively early stage our public attitude changed from viewing heroin addicts as criminals, to an image of patients in need of appropriate treatment.”

This pragmatic attitude enabled professionals from a range of disciplines including law enforcement, health, social services and politics to combine efforts to find a range of solutions to the host of issues surrounding heroin abuse.

Professor Uchtenhagen was a member of the Federal Drug Commission at the time, and was responsible for the development and implementation of the research into the use of heroin as a form of treatment.

As a result of these concerted efforts, the Swiss were the first to set up the controversial heroin-assisted programmes in the 1990s. These programmes were targeted at the small proportion of users who did not respond to methadone treatment, enabling professionals to tackle some of the more difficult, hardcore cases.

It is perhaps surprising that such a small, culturally traditional country such as Switzerland should spearhead such an unconventional action plan.

“Switzerland is a very conservative country. But we are also pragmatic,” says Uchtenhagen.

“It is in the Swiss character to want to find out ourselves what’s good for our people, and not to follow the example of others blindly.”

Those working on the projects knew it was crucial to keep the public informed in order to gain their trust.

“Public availability of trustworthy information, on process and outcome data, was paramount,” Uchtenhagen wrote recently in a case study on drug policy.

With his first-hand experience, Professor Uchtenhagen was elected as Chair of the Cantonal Drug Commission, which liaised between the authorities and those on the frontline, and published reports including situational analyses and recommendations for action.

At the time, opinions diverged greatly and not everyone embraced the radical proposals, particularly outside the German-speaking part of Switzerland, which was more affected than other areas.

But the programmes yielded impressive results, and won over many critics, both at home and abroad.

“Other countries started much later with elements such as harm reduction, experimentation, and research on heroin-assisted treatment, so this all contributes to our more visible success,” Professor Uchtenhagen says.

Results from the programmes informed changes in drug policy in the late 80s and 90s, which in turn dramatically reduced the heroin problem.

Police cleared the so-called “Needle Park” in Zurich in February 1992, and addicts were dispersed all over, which was a catastrophe. The scene reformed in an unused railway station nearby and got even worse.

Health professionals responded with a surge in activity: treatment capacity was increased, shelters and day programmes were provided, and low threshold contact and counselling centres were set up throughout the canton. The result was an infrastructure of medical and social care, which helped prevent the same catastrophic consequences when the scene at the railway station was finally closed down in 1994.

In the same year, new clinics for heroin-assisted treatment for the most chronic and marginalised addicts were set up.

Since 1991, deaths as a result of overdose have reduced by approximately 50 percent, and the instance of HIV infections has reduced by 65 percent.

In 1998, the Swiss people voted in favour of the four-pillar policy with a two-thirds majority, and in 1999 a majority voted in favour of continuing heroin-assisted treatment.

Although these results herald good news overall, the fact that the problems are no longer as visible as they once were has had an unintended negative effect - funding to keep the programmes going is no longer as forthcoming as it once was.

“There are other priorities now on the political agenda so it’s not so easy to keep going with the things that we have been setting up and to launch new ones to meet the drug problems of today,” Professor Uchtenhagen laments.

Having dedicated most of his life to working with addictions to substances like heroin, the professor refuses to give up.

He now has his eye on new experiments aimed at Switzerland’s most profuse and popular drug: cannabis. Whether the new experiments turn out to be as successful as the heroin projects remains to be seen.
Did the number of heroin users go up or down?

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?
1) Must make life pretty easy when you can always say it wasn't your fault since you didn't have a choice.

2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
You still don't understand. I'll ask the question again: can you imagine an emotional pain so intense that you'll do anything to get away from it? By your answers, I'll assume you can't.

 
Here's my beef:

The world is full of funcitonal alchocolics. People that work 9-5, have children, pay the bills, and drink all night. They're addicts, but they are able to function in society despite their addiction. But remove alcohol and substitute it with heroin or cocaine, and suddenly they're criminals and losers. Some of these funcitonal alcoholics behave exactly like the drug addicts they condemn simply because the government decided that durg A is better than drug B.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?
1) Must make life pretty easy when you can always say it wasn't your fault since you didn't have a choice.

2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
You still don't understand. I'll ask the question again: can you imagine an emotional pain so intense that you'll do anything to get away from it? By your answers, I'll assume you can't.
Why would I run to a drug that I've never touched to cure some emotional pain?

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Drug addicts aren't weak. This shows a total lack of understanding of human nature. Humans have been using drugs for thousands of years. It's innately human. Furthermore, I'm really pleased that some of us are so happy and content that we never feel the need to lose control. That's cool. But you don't know a man until you've walked in his shoes. And until you do, don't judge him for succumbing to drugs.
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?
1) Must make life pretty easy when you can always say it wasn't your fault since you didn't have a choice.

2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
You still don't understand. I'll ask the question again: can you imagine an emotional pain so intense that you'll do anything to get away from it? By your answers, I'll assume you can't.
Why would I run to a drug that I've never touched to cure some emotional pain?
You didn't answer the question.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
jdoggydogg said:
Oh, come on. There's a tipping point and you know it. Making a decision to lose control every now and then is a lot different than not being able to control your use.
Look, we have big brains that can make rational decisions. This is certain. But as Huxley says, "What we feel and think and are is to a great extent determined by the state of our ductless glands and viscera.” As someone who struggled with addiction years ago, I know the slippery slope of drug use. I'm not saying that drug abusers have no control and they should get a free pass. I'm saying that the idea of freewill is somewhat of an illusion.
Oh come on. Unless you're pinned down and someone jabs a needle in your arm, the first time you put that substance in your body it is 100% your choosing.
Can you imagine being so miserable that the thought of a temporary release from your pain is worth it?
Still 100% your choice. And no, I would be smart enough not to compound my problems by using heroin.
No.

1) You're assuming that freewill is real, and I reject that. You're claiming that one simply needs to choose the correct path, and nature/nurture evidence shows us that it's not that simple.

2) Millions of brilliant people have succumbed to drug use. Were they smart enough?
1) Must make life pretty easy when you can always say it wasn't your fault since you didn't have a choice.

2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
You still don't understand. I'll ask the question again: can you imagine an emotional pain so intense that you'll do anything to get away from it? By your answers, I'll assume you can't.
Why would I run to a drug that I've never touched to cure some emotional pain?
You didn't answer the question.
You didn't answer my question.

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.
Like Weed?

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.
Like Weed?
No.

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.
Like Weed?
No.
Why not?

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.
Like Weed?
No.
Why not?
Google it?

 
I like how the guy whose avatar and whole on-board persona is based on a character who spends every night in a bar is judging one of the best actors of our generation for od'ing on heroin. Were Cliff Calvin a real person, I'd be willing to bet he would be dead from cirrhosis of the liver. He made the choice to drink every night.

 
I like how the guy whose avatar and whole on-board persona is based on a character who spends every night in a bar is judging one of the best actors of our generation for od'ing on heroin. Were Cliff Calvin a real person, I'd be willing to bet he would be dead from cirrhosis of the liver. He made the choice to drink every night.
But how's that possible? Cliff was too smart to allow that to happen.

 
I like how the guy whose avatar and whole on-board persona is based on a character who spends every night in a bar is judging one of the best actors of our generation for od'ing on heroin. Were Cliff Calvin a real person, I'd be willing to bet he would be dead from cirrhosis of the liver. He made the choice to drink every night.
But how's that possible? Cliff was too smart to allow that to happen.
Lol

 
I like how the guy whose avatar and whole on-board persona is based on a character who spends every night in a bar is judging one of the best actors of our generation for od'ing on heroin. Were Cliff Calvin a real person, I'd be willing to bet he would be dead from cirrhosis of the liver. He made the choice to drink every night.
But how's that possible? Cliff was too smart to allow that to happen.
Nah, he didnt have a choice in the matter since he didnt have free will. Emotional problems maybe?

 
Serious question is it possible for someone who has never tried drugs to be an addict but has fought off strong desires to dull the pain of their life through drug use?

 
Serious question is it possible for someone who has never tried drugs to be an addict but has fought off strong desires to dull the pain of their life through drug use?
Could you rephrase that. Im confused about what exactly you are asking

 
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/02/philip-seymour-hoffman-and-heroin

Switzerland and the Netherlands pioneered this "Heroin Assisted Treatment" (HAT) approach in the 1990s, and both countries adopted it as national policy in the 2000s. Heroin use has steadily declined since; by the 2000s the Dutch incidence of new heroin users had fallen to essentially zero, and the aging population of addicts from the 1970s and '80s continues to shrink. The average age of Dutch heroin users rose from 34 in 1997 to 45 in 2009.
Heroin assisted treatment is fully a part of the national health system in Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom. Additional trials are being carried out in Canada and Belgium.
Whoa, never heard of this heroin treatment regimen. It sounds crazy at first thought, but actually makes a ton of sense of many different levels. No way I ever see the USA adopting anything close to it, but its ability to not only help users get past their addiction in a safe fashion, as well as eliminate the illegal market, is a winning combination.

 
2) No, apparently they were not smart enough to not inject a drug that would ruin their life.
For most it's a gradual process to get to that point. It's not like people are just looking for something to do that day and decide on injecting heroin.
At some point, they choose to pick up that needle. That's all I'm saying.
Well yeah, but they're in a very different place than what you know. You're way oversimplifying it.

It could start by taking a relatively "safe" drug a doctor prescribed. The addict's brain wants more and more. It's often an uncontrollable decent. look at alcoholics who drink 5 bottles of mouthwash a day. Did they choose to start drinking mouthwash? They didn't just go into the bathroom one day and wonder what it'd be like to take a few swigs.
Like Weed?
No.
Why not?
Weed's not addictive.

 
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(06)68804-1/abstract

Findings

Every second person began their first substitution treatment within 2 years of starting to use heroin regularly. Incidence of heroin use rose steeply, starting with about 80 people in 1975, culminating in 1990 with 850 new users, and declining substantially to about 150 users in 2002. Two-thirds of those who had left substitution treatment programmes re-entered within the next 10 years. The population of problematic heroin users declined by 4% a year. The cessation rate in Switzerland was low, and therefore, the prevalence rate declined slowly. Our prevalence model accords with data generated by different approaches.
http://www.idhdp.com/media/8758/heroin_assisted_treatment.pdf

29,000 heroin users in the mid-90's compared to 23,000 users in 2002.
 
Why do people who have never used drugs think they know the mind of someone who does?
As well as a lot of people use hardcore drugs, similar to how most use alcohol, without becoming strung-out addicts.
Everything I've read about heroin use always points out that the experience is so amazing that you never forget it. Since the memory is so intense whenever you have a bad time in your life it's easy to go back and get hooked on it. Very few people who try heroin are able to avoid going through a period of heavy use at some point.

 
Serious question is it possible for someone who has never tried drugs to be an addict but has fought off strong desires to dull the pain of their life through drug use?
Could you rephrase that. Im confused about what exactly you are asking
Is it possible for someone to be classified as an addict despite never having taken drugs? They experience strong urges and desires to take them but resist the urge to do so, much like a recovering addict might. Similar to a person who is gay but because of fear or religious belief they have never had any gay encounters, but they are still gay correct? I know its just semantics but all the arguments made me think of a person I know who I think has an addictive personality yet as far as I know hasn't done drugs. Sorry for the derail

 
Serious question is it possible for someone who has never tried drugs to be an addict but has fought off strong desires to dull the pain of their life through drug use?
Could you rephrase that. Im confused about what exactly you are asking
Is it possible for someone to be classified as an addict despite never having taken drugs? They experience strong urges and desires to take them but resist the urge to do so, much like a recovering addict might. Similar to a person who is gay but because of fear or religious belief they have never had any gay encounters, but they are still gay correct? I know its just semantics but all the arguments made me think of a person I know who I think has an addictive personality yet as far as I know hasn't done drugs. Sorry for the derail
Alcohol is a drug, are they addicted to that?

 
Serious question is it possible for someone who has never tried drugs to be an addict but has fought off strong desires to dull the pain of their life through drug use?
There are people with addictive personalities that avoid drug use for just that reason.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top